SONI KUMAR ALIAS SONI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. This order will dispose of Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009 filed by Soni Kumar @ Soni son of Mohan Dass (petitioner No.1) and Mohan Dass son of Jamma Singh (petitioner No.2) as also Crl. Misc. No. M-33298 of 2009 filed by Sant Lal son of Amar Lal. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of the complainant Vinod Kumar who has stated that his son Vanit Kumar @ Ankash aged about 7 years had on 27.2.2008 at about 3.30 p.m. gone outside the house for playing on the road but he did not return till 5.00 p.m. Thereafter, the complainant and his wife Raj Dulari searched for their son but he could not be found. Then the complainant along with his neighbour Vinay Kumar came to the Police Station Division No.3 at about 9.00 p.m. and submitted the complaint regarding missing of his son. According to the complainant some unidentified person had kidnapped his son for ransom. The supplementary statement of Vinod Kumar was recorded on 5.3.2008 in which he stated that Saleem Mohammad son of Mohammad Yamin who was living on the second floor of his house had gone to his village on 25.2.2008 and he informed the complainant that he had seen his son Vanit Kumar @ Ankash on 28.2.2008 with Anant Ram who is the brother of the complainant Vinod Kumar, Mohan Dass (petitioner No.2 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009), Sandeep Kumar (non-petitioner) and Soni (petitioner No.1 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009) at about 11.00 am at Saharanpur Railway Station. Anant Ram had picked the son of the complainant in his arm. It is submitted that Vanit Kumar @ Ankash son of the complainant had been kidnapped by the brother of the complainant namely Anant Ram and his brother-in-law Mohan Dass (petitioner No.2 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009) and Soni son of Mohan Dass (petitioner No.1 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009) along with others who were also involved. The statement of Salim Mohammed was also recorded under Section 161 CrPC on 5.3.208 in which he stated that he had gone to his village on 25.2.2008 and on 28.2.2008 he had gone to Saharanpur for taking medicines. At about 11.00 am when he reached at Railway Station, Saharanpur, he saw Anant Ram (brother of the complainant) along with his relatives Sandeep Kumar (non-petitioner), Mohan Dass (petitioner No.2 in Crl. Misc. No. M- 29803 of 2009), Soni (Petitioner No.1 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009) and Vanit Kumar @ Ankash son of Vinod Kumar, complainant were standing there and Anant Ram (brother of the complainant) had picked Vanit Kumar @ Ankash in his arm. When he returned to Ludhiana, the complainant Vinod Kumar had told him that his son had been kidnapped on 28.7.2008 and he narrated what he saw to the complainant. The statement of Salim Mohammed during the course of the trial has been recorded as PW3 on 13.7.2009. In his statement in Court it is stated that when he reached near the bus stand near Railway Station, he saw Anant Ram (brother of the complainant) had caught the child namely Vanit Kumar @ Ankash son of the complainant and three persons also accompanied him, whose names he did not know. Salim Mohammed (PW-3) was declared hostile and cross-examined. The effect of the statement of Salim Mohammed (PW3) recorded by the trial Court is to be considered and gone into by the learned trial Court after evidence is complete. At this stage, it would be improper to appreciate the same. However, Soni Kumar (petitioner No.1 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009) is in custody since 22.3.2008 and Mohan Dass (petitioner No.2 in Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009) is in custody since 18.4.2008. Insofar as Sant Lal (petitioner in Crl. Misc. No. M-33298 of 2009) is concerned, he has also been named as an accused in the supplementary statement of Vinod Kumar recorded on 21.11.2008 and it is stated that somebody had informed Vinod Kumar complainant that in the kidnapping of his son, his sister-in-law Narma Devi wife of Anant Ram, the brother of the complainant and his brother-in-law namely Sant Lal (petitioner in Crl. Misc. No.M-33298 of 2009) had a hand. The said statement of Vinod Kumr, it is alleged, is hearsay evidence. Besides, Narma Devi wife of Anant Ram who has also been named on the basis of similar supplementary statement, has been granted the concession of bail by this Court vide order dated 25.5.2009 passed in Crl. Misc. No. M-13056 of 2009. The trial in the case is likely to take time. Out of 12 PWs cited by the prosecution, 5 PWs have been examined. The main accused Anant Ram (brother of the complainant Vinod Kumar) is absconding. Though the child has still not been traced, however, further custody of the petitioners in the respective petitions (i.e. Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009 and Crl. Misc. No. M- 33298 of 2009) would not serve any purpose.

(2.) IN view of the above, the Crl. Misc. petitions (i.e. Crl. Misc. No. M-29803 of 2009 and Crl. Misc. No. M- 33298 of 2009) are allowed and the petitioners namely Soni Kumar @ Soni and Mohan Dass (petitioners No.1 and 2 in Crl. Misc. No.M-29803 of 2009) and Sant Lal (petitioner in Crl. Misc. No.M-33298 of 2009) on their furnishing personal bonds and surety each to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ludhiana shall be admitted to bail.